Immigration will show whether Marco Rubio is still a lightweight

June 6, 2013|Scott Maxwell, TAKING NAMES

Marco Rubio has long been dogged with a reputation as a lightweight.

And for good reason. He started his tenure as state House speaker by renovating the legislators' private dining room and ended it by printing copies of a legislative yearbook — a glossy pictorial Rubio filled with pictures of, well, himself.

And then there were the more serious issues — such as the unadvertised teaching gig he snagged after steering money to Florida International University, and the $100,000 worth of limo rides, plane trips and other perks he racked up on the GOP's special-interest-funded credit cards.

Quite simply, all of Rubio's doe-eyed sincerity about fiscal restraint and personal sacrifices never matched his actions.

So when Rubio, as a freshman U.S. senator, began eyeing the White House, he knew he had to do something to burnish his credentials.

Immigration reform was supposed to be that thing. And it was a good choice.

Reforming immigration is what Jeb Bush used to describe as a "BHAG" — a big, hairy audacious goal — a mission that a lesser man wouldn't even consider.

And for a while, it looked as if Rubio might prove his critics wrong. The son of Cuban immigrants joined a bipartisan coalition of senators who also were willing to put their reputations on the line to make progress on an important and divisive issue.

And they produced something solid and concrete.

It wasn't perfect. Not from anyone's standpoint. It was complex and grew to somewhere around 1,000 pages — the kind of paperwork mountain that Rubio would fume about had any Democrat proposed it.

But there was no doubt that it was substantive — and that it addressed concerns from all sides.

We're talking beefed-up border protection to the tune of $4.5 billion for security, surveillance, drones and fencing. But also paths to citizenship — though laborious ones as long as 13 years — for those already here.

Most important, the reform effort proposed by the "Gang of Eight" moves the ball forward.

Nowhere was that success better realized than in the religious community. Just this week, liberal nuns joined forces with conservative Baptists to praise Rubio for taking a courageous stand. Neither group embraced every aspect of the bill. But both embraced it as a whole.

But the going also got tough.

Tea-party activists started fussing. Conservative radio hosts began ranting. And House Republicans started hurling at Rubio the kind of stinging one-liners usually reserved for liberal enemies … the kind that Rubio often liked to hurl himself.

For instance, after Rubio tried to pitch his compromise plan to GOP colleagues in the House, Republican Darrell Issa responded: "We have enough House members at 435, so we really don't need another one."

Suddenly, the stories of Rubio-the-fearless-leader were replaced with headlines such as "Why Marco Rubio is against his own immigration bill" and "Rubio: Immigration bill does not have votes to pass."

Instead of talking immigration, Rubio tried to change the discussion. He was back to ranting about "Obamacare" — going so far as to call for a new amendment to the U.S. Constitution to block the health-care act . Even Fox News host Greta Van Susteren seemed puzzled by that impractical idea.

Still, I'm not yet ready to write off Rubio and immigration reform yet. The cause is too important. And frankly, I think Rubio is too deeply invested to walk away.

After all, walking away would simply re-enforce the notion that he's a lightweight who's better at making headlines than making a difference.